A modest proposal?

Before coming to Brazil we had a training session at the Institute on how to do interviews. One f the course providers, Kevin Middlebrook, told us to be prepared for the unexpected, citing a case when a previous student had travelled abroad only to discover the libraries were all closed and their staff on strike. Needless to say, that rather scuppered her project.

I never thought it would happen to me. But then it’s not too bad for me. My project deals with state-level government so the strikes by federal level civil servants shouldn’t be too problematic. At least let’s hops so: I haven’t seen any news from Ceará or Porto Alegre since I got here.

So what are the civil servants attached to the Culture Ministry striking about? The usual things of increased pay (the two on the picket line outside the Museum of Fine Arts next door to the National Library told me salaries had been frozen) and a better career structure and plan. The leaflet they gave me claimed they had sent their concerns to Gilberto Gil, the culture minister, nearly a year ago but hadn’t had a reply yet.

While the leaflet goes on to say how much they approve of having a prestigious and well known minister like Gil, it seems to me they might have a better chance of making their voices heard if they went for something radical, like demonstrations outside record shops and calling for a boycott on the sale of his albums.

At the very least it would get them noticed - but not necessarily generate sympathy amongst Gil fans.

When in Rome...

Having visited the Fundaçao Getulio Vargas on Wednesday, it was the National Library’s turn on Thursday. I thought it might be a good idea to see if there was anything in either the archives or the newspaper section relevant to my project.

But you may recall there was a big demonstration on Tuesday andI had completely failed to connect the two. Consequently, I had overlooked the fact this might mean that everything cultural was closed.

Faced with a locked gate and absolutely no sign of life in the National Library, I did what I think any self-respecting Carioca would have done: I went off to lunch and hit the beach.

Problematic

Listening to the radio or reading the paper, you would imagine Brazil is in one of its worst crisis for some time. No, not the allegations that the supposedly whiter-than-white Workers Party was making monthly payments to allied congressmen in different parties to secure votes (and which the president either didn’t know about or turned a blind eye depending on your reading).

No, it was Brazil’s defeat to Argentina in the World Cup qualifiers, by 3-1. Argentina have now qualified while the World Cup holders will have to graft out a few more points before they can secure their spot. Brazil’s performance was poor though: two goals down by half time and never really looking like a serious opposition.

Time elastic

Attended my first capoeira class at Marrom’s academy last night. Actually making it was an achievement in itself. The day before yesterday I’d been told that classes took place at 5pm. So I duly turned up there yesterday at the foot of Ladeira Ary Barroso in Leme with a friend from the Institute in London, Luke (he’s doing some interesting work here for his dissertation, but that’s for another post).

But would you believe it, there was no class. At least not until 5.30pm. Slowly, as various students came into the sports centre it became apprent they weren’t from Marrom’s class, but from another mestre, Peixinho, who also uses the space. Only then did someone explain to us that there were two groups and they each had different starting times. Marrom, I was now informed, wouldstart his class at 7. So Luke and I went off to find something to eat before returning.

This time Marrom was there, wearing his Greek football shirt that he was given by one of the students in London last month. You could be forgiven for thinkng he hadn’t taken it off in that time. But besides Marrom and a student of his, there was nobody else around. Ah, he said, that’s because we start at 8.

Sothere you have it: ask four or five Brazilians for information and you get seven or eight conflicting answers. That said, the class was a good one and I know for certain when Marrom’s class on Thursday is directly from the man himself. No, not at 8pm, but this time at 7pm!

I’m sure there’s a logic somewhere here but I can’t quite see it yet.

Making connections

Besides the underemployment in the formal sector here (the informal sector doesn’t even bear thinking about), the other thing I’ve noticed is the abundance of Inernet cafes. A few years ago Zona Sul was lucky to have one, in the Letras e Esprecoes bookshop in Ipanema. And trying to use it was frustrating in the extreme. Since there was only one, you had to wait until the person on it came off. But because it was unlimited access you could wait five minutes or an hour. Sometimes even longer.

Then they introduced a list: you could put your name down to use it if the computer was in use. The problem was that didn’t work either; since computer use varied from person to person, you might come back after an hour and find yoursefl still waiting; or as usually happened with me, come back half an hour later and find you had lost your place since it became free fve minutes earlier and I wasn’t around.

When I was last here in Rio you can’t believe how much my mood improved when I discovered they had put another three computers into the shop. But by then the bookshop had competition in the area.

Is this an endorsement for free markets? I never thought I would mention that in the context of Latin America!

First impressions

Usually it takes a few days to wind down and get into the swing of things Brazilian. That’s because I tend to rush around in London. When I get to Rio the pace of life seems to slow down. But that’s because I’m normally here on holiday.

Yesterday during my first full day in Rio I noticed how quickly I had slipped back into the groove. Going around the Baia de Guanabara in Botofogo on a bus, the driver putting the vehicle almost on two wheels, realised that life in Brazil need not be slow.

But what Rio can be is disorientating. Early afternoon I set off to walk to walk to Leme, partly to take in the sights, partly to ind when capoeira classes take place at Marrom’s academy (Marrow is associated with my group back in London). Down Av. Ataulfo de Paiva, Leblon’s main street, I was met by first jarring image: an old, black woman sitting listlessly by the side of the road, holding out a plastic cup to collect change. As I passed I noticed a middle-aged white woman walking her two poodles, decked out in red coats and shoes on each foot. Two more contrasting - and telling - images of the Brazilian condition would be harder to find.

On Rio Branco, the main throughway through the Centro commercial district, public sector workers were out on strike. A large march was taking place, led by a series of trade unionists on a double decker bus. They were protesting reforms by the Government and making a racket. The police were trying to hurry them along and blowing their whistles to drown out the sound. But the protestors were prepared, carrying megaphones and waving banners which showed they came from every part of govenment, including the finance, agriculture and culture ministries.

But the problem is not the reforms, but underemployment. Stocking up in the local supermarket two people worked at the cashier’s, one totting up the bill, the other bagging the things I bought. Similarly, in the Martinica buffet restaurant in Ipanema one woman gave me my receipt while another collected it from me on the way out. And in Centro I went to have my student card phtocopied (it’s the best I can do withouth getting business cards) and the shop employed seven or eight people and five photocopiers to do the job. Whoever heard of doing it yourself?

Yet some things are changing in Rio. On the Copacabana beachfront work is apace to replace some of the old kiosks with modern ones and a wooden deck area which should provide more space for more people. The signs around the work say this is a public private partnership project (which as readers of this bloig will know, is the new wway of doing things n Brazil). Whether it is the municipal or state government sponsoring the work I wasn’t sure, but if it’s the former I wouldn’t be surprised: the mayor, Cesar Maia, already announced his intention to run for president next year; a few new public works would raise his profile. Similarly, the cathedral and old convent opposite the Praça 15 de novembro is also undergoing rennovation. About time too, given the amount of graffiti it was covered in a few years ago.

But the most evocative image of Rio yesterday had nothing to do with politics, demonstrations or social problems. Instead it was on the bus, yet another driver tearing around the bend of Botafogo’s beachfront. The Christ on top of the Corcovado looked serene, the effect of a wisp of mist and cloud around his feet. The sun had already set over the hills beyond, but still it was light and the edges of the clouds gavce off a pink glow – a reminder of the day that had just finished.

New post, new location

So here I am, in Rio. What a novelty to be posting a blog not from the kitchen counter in Bethnal Green, or in the computer room at the Institute, but from the sixteenth floor of an apartment block in Leblon. You can’t get more chic than this – alright, maybe Ipanema

If I lean slightly to my left I can look northwards, to the statue of Christ on the other side of the lagoon and beneath it the clipped course of the Jockey Club. All around are hills, full of green – the vestiges of the jungle that once dominated the area before the Portuguese arrived. I’ve got the glass door which leads onto the balcony open and I can hear the traffic bustling below.

At the moment the top of my head feels like it is 2 metres higher than it should be, while the ears are partly blocked, the result of an almost 12-hour flight from Paris which got in this morning. And as most joureys go, it was relatively uneventful. Which is even more annoying, especiallysince I anticipated problems. Last time I brought a lap top into the country Customs wanted to charge me import duty. This time I was prepared, with a receipt and a bill proving I don’t live here just in case. Instead I just got waved through.

Typical.

Part of me feels I should get cracking with arranging interviews and organising who I’m going to meet and – more importantly – where I’m going to stay in Fortaleza when I head up there on Sunday. But with a brain as fuzzy as mine, I don’t think i’m good for anything. Instead I’m going to potter down to the beach and maybe wander over to Leme to check out exactly where Marrom’s capoeira academy is (after my non-appearance there two years ago I think I should try and go at least once this trip).

But before I do all that theres’something which has to be done first: a burger and an acaí at one of the quisoques on the street corner here. Or maybe a bargain ‘comida a quilo’, where I can load up on buffet foods, including some much-anticipated (and cheap relative to the UK) steak. I’m going to have to economise, but I think I’m entitled to at least one splurge.

Cultural commentary

After tramping around northern Oxford and St Anthony’s on Friday, I finally found my way to St Anne’s College and the ‘Brazilian Culture Abroad’ conference. The travails I have to put myself through, so you, dear reader, can be kept abreast of all things Brazilian!

Although the conference had virtually no relevance to my main topic and subject of study – politics – it was interesting in its own right and added to my general store of knowledge. I also went with the secret hope that readers – who find talk of Brazilian politics about as interesting as watching paint dry in tropical heat, might find something more appealing in cultural matters.

So to give a brief run through, here are the highlights (recorded earlier): I arrived midway through New York University’s Robert Stam emphasising the ‘cannibalistic’ nature of aspects of Brazilian music and film, especially since the 1960s. He stressed the comparability of social and cultural experience in Brazil and the US, including slavery, the treatment of the indigenous and borrowing of musical types (e.g. jazz and bossa nova). To illustrate his points he showed a series of music videos, including Caetano Veloso’s ‘Haiti’ (not easy to listen too, but a three-minute discourse on black oppression in Brazil), and ‘Mão de Limpeza’ performed by Gilberto Gil and Chico Buarque, to highlight racial differences.

Lucia Nagib has the job I should have. She’s professor of cinema at Leeds University and used her presentation to introduce a new article she’s working on regarding world cinema. In particular she’s identified four main features of world cinema: local colour, realism, a private (i.e. identifiable) hero and a chain of improbable but convincing events as part of the script. These common themes crop up time and again, owing to the need to appeal to wider, trans-national audiences and funding. Nagib stressed the importance of ‘vertical integration’ in world cinema, with scripts being taken up by groups like the Sundance foundation who puts aspiring world cinema makers in touch with foreign sources of funding and distribution links – factors which are necessary if the films are to be successful abroad which will also help recoup costs.

The LA County Museum of Art’s curator, Lynn Zelevansky, discussed the Brazilian contribution to an exhibition, ‘Geometry’, last year. She argued the work was good enough in its own right to be displayed and didn’t need to be presented in a specific Latin American category. In particular she suggested that Brazilian modern art was developing simultaneously with that in other countries; and from what I could glean, it was uncompromising in that unlike the world cinema case, it wasn’t being tailored for foreign audiences. With high art it was more a case of Brazilian modern art: take it or leave it.

José Geraldo Couto from the Folha de São Paulo then talked about the role of football as a cultural export. In particular he argued the traditional stereotypes of Brazil (and its football), of a lazy, happy people, was being broken down. The success of the 1994 and 2002 World Cup teams was achieved through discipline and efficiency, contradicting the 1970 vision of exuberant, joyful playing. Good, prominent coaches abroad, like Scolari, Zico and Vanderlei Luxemburgo, was also emphasising this sense of order and discipline. Finally, the chaotic nature of Brazilian clubs’ financial situation was noted, as shown by the flood of Brazilian players plying their trade abroad. The result of these trends was to present a paradox according to Couto: ‘rich’ football on the pitch, and ‘poor’ off it.

Finally Nelson Motta, a music producer and radio presenter, gave a good overview of Brazilian popular music, from Pixinguinha and Carmen Miranda to Mr Bongo, Favela Chic and D2 today. There weren’t any discernable themes in his lecture, but as I said to the Brazil Centre’s Leslie Bethell afterwards, it would be really useful to have Motta’s words kept for those looking for an introduction into the subject.

I also made a contribution by asking Motta if he felt that the resentment and jealousy accorded to Carmen Miranda by the Brazilian public in the 1940s and 1950s had gone away. Motta had stressed that Miranda had been repackaged for a different audience, made exotic and sexy to Americans when she tried to break the Northern market. In response Motta suggested that no, little had changed. He cited the case of Bebel Gilberto, with a strong musical pedigree and great songs, who remains unknown by Brazilians at best, and the subject of contempt in much the same way as Miranda – even if she didn’t have to be re-branded in quite the same way. But then, did she need to be? Brazilian stereotypes, whatever Couto claims, still remain.

No longer hirstute

Also, in anticipation of some beach weather (did you really think I wouldn’t take advantage of that?!) in Brazil I shaved the beard off to make sure I catch both some rays and for convenience. It’s been nearly nine months since I first grew it, having been through various stages, from neatly trimmed to unreconstructed savage – and then grungy student.

Having made the decision though, I looked in the mirror – and saw a boiled egg looking back at me.

Hair-raising

Had my hair cut on Saturday in anticipation of my trip to Brazil later today. While I think I can get away with a beehive in the UK during summer, the thought of sweating away under it all in Brazil seemed unappealing. So a quick visit to my regular barber, up the Bethnal Green Road, was in order.

What’s special about this place is that I’m usually the only white face in there. It’s run by two Bangladeshis, one of who is an old man with a henna-tinted beard. The place is quite basic, with walls that don’t look like they’ve seen a clean for many a year. I’ve never been to Bangladesh, but I occasionally pretend that this must be what Sylhet (where many Tower Hamlets Bangladeshis come from) is like, especially the chatter which takes place between the barbers and their customers.

There’s also a bit of camaraderie there too. When I popped in last November for a trim they closed the shop for half an hour when some friends arrived, bearing boxes of fried chicken. The radio programme, consisting of South Asian music was interrupted with the sound of the muzzein cutting in and calling people to prayer.

I’d forgotten that we were in the middle of Ramadan and they hadn’t eaten or drunk since dawn. I was invited to join them but I declined; it didn’t seem right to eat when I’d had lunch a few hours earlier. Within minutes of putting away their first meal for nearly 9 hours one of the barbers was behind a chair, slapping it and making it ready for me.

But there’s also a slightly mischievous reason why I go there too. My hair is thick and grows all over the place. While the older man never seems to have any problem cutting my hair (if he does, he doesn’t show it), his younger colleague always looks exasperated. Tongue out at the corner of his mouth, he spends ages grappling with the chaotic nature of my hair, trying to work out why it doesn’t fall neatly as it does for most Bangladeshis.

Being concise

It strikes me that my recent posts have been rather long – not very reader-friendly.

Perhaps this post will compensate for all that academic waffle. If only till the weekend. Be warned: there’s conference on Brazilian culture which may require a write-up.

You can’t really complain. After all, I didn’t write up a research seminar I attended on Tuesday regarding exchange rate policy in Argentina during the 1980s. You see, I can be discriminating!

Educashun, educashun, educashun

Down at the Institute of Education for a morning seminar on popular education in Latin America yesterday. It was run by the Latin American Perspectives in Education (LAPE) group who have been extremely active since they started up earlier in the academic year. If there’s one gripe I have it’s that having signed up to their emails, I get copied into everyone else’s.

While the seminar gave me a new insight into thinking about education and my dissertation topic, I must admit to being no closer to understanding what is meant by ‘popular education’. As far as I can tell it involves education knowledge and practices from the grassroots up, drawing on local ideas and communities – I think.

Of the three speakers, Glasgow University’s Liam Kane made the most interesting points for me, arguing that ideology was an important part of an educator’s makeup; the challenge is to separate ideology from teaching methods, so the educated can see where the teacher is coming from. Afterwards I asked him whether ideology and methodology weren’t linked together. While there was some relationship Liam pointed out that good educators were able to separate their ideology from the teaching, while some bad teaching he had seen involved sound ideology (from his socialist perspective) but poor methods.

David Archer from Action Aid gave his presentation on the NGO-teaching union campaign to improve public education (public being distinct from popular since it is provided by the state) on a national and global scale. I attended the education conference at Oxford University’s Brazil centre where he gave exactly the same presentation so was already aware what he would say.

Finally Eduardo Zimmerman from the Universidad de San Andrés in Buenos Aires made some observations from the two presentations, including the institutional arrangements available for popular education (can’t decentralisation and federal arrangements assist in innovative education practice, including popular education forms distinct from the mainstream public system?), the fine line between and educator’s ideological commitment and encouraging students to think and act for themselves, and the actual content of popular education (what exactly should be taught? Is the purpose to reintroduce common values?)

All food for thought, if not directly related to my dissertation topic per se. Speaking of which, I’m off to Brazil on Monday to begin the fieldwork. So far I’ve got people provisionally lined up to speak to, but it’s not set in stone; I’ll try and do that when I get to Rio next week.

And to the relief of my one or two readers, I’ll also try and bring in some lighter topics as well.

Choosing...

As I’m attending a conference on globalising Brazilian culture at the Brazil Centre in Oxford this Friday, I had to make the difficult decision not to go to Oxford today for the Albert Fishlow seminar on Lula. Oxford twice in one week seems greedy – especially as I’m trying to save money before next week’s month long ‘research’ trip to Brazil.

I just hope Julia kept good notes…

Suitable for publication?

Spent some of yesterday morning polishing up my Liberator article grandly titled (at least by me) on ‘Where Next For the Lib Dems’ – for what it’s worth. Can you believe it won’t make it into June’s edition because it’s too short?! Mark, one of the collective members, asked me if I’d consider revising and perhaps expanding it since in its initial version it wouldn’t meet the magazine’s format.

That’s the first time I’ve ever been asked to write more! So I’ve given them more. Let’s await with baited breath the July edition. Failing that, for the solitary reader of my blog, don’t worry: it will be posted here if it isn’t.

Also was in Stanfords yesterday, marvelling at the new Brazil guidebook. My current one – dating back to 1998 – is badly out of date and I need a new one before next week’s trip. As I was leaving I came across this travel writing competition being advertised at the cashier’s. The deadline is quite soon (this Friday), but I’ll give it a stab. At the very least it’ll be another piece which can then be touted elsewhere (or posted here).

New Feminism?

Germaine Greer was on the radio this morning, talking about a film on feminism which she’s made for Channel 5. Perhaps there was a miscommunication of Ali G proportions over the word ‘feminism’ by the channel’s commissioners?

Frustratingly she wasn’t given enough airtime to expand on her views, being interrupted by the men on the programme. But what I think I gleaned from her was the following: (1) feminism as understood in the 1960s liberation sense is no more; (2) today feminism is commonly perceived as enabling women to engage in the same activities and processes of men, in other words ‘feminising patriarchal social forms’ (my term, not Greer’s); (3) today’s young women may not see themselves as feminists, but they have the education and opportunities which their mothers didn’t to struggle for greater equality; (4) that struggle for equality – however nebulous – is feminism; (5) Greer doesn’t know what a ‘feminised world’ would look like.

Which does beg the following questions: (i) can we ever reach a ‘feminised’ end goal? (ii) would we recognise a feminised world if we could reach it? (iii) given (2), (5), (i) and (ii), would a feminised world be any different to the current one?

Meanwhile I found myself worrying about some contradictions within the observations made by Greer. If women have become more confident and assertive, through education, employment and other opportunities, what does it suggest if they do not engage in a public struggle for further female emancipation?

During the interview I kept reflecting on some of the sociological work which has been done on female-headed households in Latin America, most commonly in Mexico. With the onset of free markets and economic liberalisation, vast numbers of jobs have been shed, putting men out of work and the nuclear family under strain. Extended households have become the norm, usually headed by women as the male members either self-destruct (through alcohol abuse) or leave to search for work elsewhere. In addition these women often become the target of social redistribution programs by the state, for example receiving food or school payments. They are generally seen as more reliable in this respect than men.

Yet would these women perceive themselves to be feminists? The position which they have been raised to in their interaction with the state would suggest they have the capacity to be so. Yet in some respects their situation diverges sharply from the North-based young woman in Greer’s vision. For example, the majority of these women do not have the education, pay level or life opportunities to improve their condition; and some don’t necessarily want to either. I therefore found myself wondering whether Greer may well want to approach this theme in her next film.

That’s my philosophical stint for today. Tomorrow I promise to return to matters more mundane and everyday!

The make poverty history president?

Tony Giddens asked the Democrats’ vice presidential candidate, John Edwards, the question everyone wanted to ask: why did he and John Kerry lose the election and what must the Democrats do to take power again?

Edwards was at the LSE, presenting a lecture on ‘The New Egalitarianism’ which is also the title of a new book co-edited by Giddens. The Third Way rides again!

The actual content of Edwards’ speech was unimpressive. He stressed the importance of co-operation at both national and international levels resting on four pillars: a strong US-EU relationship, measures to fight poverty, dealing with the threat of nuclear weapons and promoting liberty and democracy.

Poverty seems to be the Edwards theme. Later I discussed with a friend the merits of him picking that as his specialist subject. He didn’t think it suitable since it was unlikely he could affect much in the way of change. I disagreed; as a part time lecturer at the University of North Carolina he’s associated with the creation of a research centre to analyse the causes and effects of poverty. That should give him some credibility when he next runs for national office compared to last year when he was picked as Kerry’s running mate.

He extolled the merits of the various anti-poverty measures in the UK, citing the baby bond scheme and various tax credits to help the family. This sounded to me as if he had already had a meeting with Gordon Brown. As if that wasn’t enough, the British goals for the EU presidency seemed to have filtered into his consciousness as well, since he also emphasised the need to address the challenges faced in Africa, and especially Sudan.

Edwards was far better on the questions than the content and delivery of his speech. Why was that? Partly it was because he was better dealing with the tangible, less with the philosophical. Both in his lecture and in the question and answer session he constantly cited moral considerations for tackling inequality and poverty; in his eyes it was the ‘right thing’ to do. As far as I could tell, he didn’t have anything more substantial in which to back up his case.

I also think he was better at the questions because of his time as a lawyer. He was sharp and quick to respond, even on the questions which seemed tricky. For instance he was asked how far he would be personally prepared to spread democracy to which he responded by saying the US shouldn’t impose it, but work with other democracies to encourage peoples in undemocratic states towards that goal. When pressed on the inconsistency between free trade and inequality, he fell back on his campaign support for US farm subsidies while pointing out that a range of different solutions would need to be pursued.

But whereas we were all starting to flag in what are extremely uncomfortable seats in the Old Theatre, he kept pointing at additional questioners. In fact Giddens had to beg him to stop as he had another meeting to go to.

Some of the questioners wanted to have a pop at the senator. One older man criticised Edwards for his rose-tinted view of American ideals (oh yes, there was a lot of that in his speech) which hardly seemed to equate with the discrimination that many had faced in the American South, even as recently as the 1950s and 1960s. Edwards was disarming and won the audience over, by pointing out in his own southern drawl that he grew up in the thick of it while he assumed the gentleman had only read about it in books. Then he took responsibility for it and argued his political life had been spent challenging those prejudices. Another challenged him on American treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. He didn’t back away from it, admitting culpability and the need to act more justly in the future.

Indeed, Edwards seems to have the air of a man who is not dwelling on the past, but thinking of the future. And this brings me back to Giddens’s original question. When confronted with why the Democrats lost in 2004, Edwards was disinclined to answer. That was for the pundits, he claimed. What he thought mattered above all was leadership. And leadership is based on principles and core values and a commitment to improve people’s lives; an idealistic tone on which to end the afternoon. But will it be enough in 2008, perhaps in a campaign headed by Edwards himself? Perhaps, but only if his gamble – becoming identified closely with this anti-poverty agenda – works and offers an effective counter-argument to Republicans’ tax cut incentives.

Economising Brazil

To Oxford where the summer is in full swing, the undergraduates are decked out in ridiculous sub fusc dress on their way to exams and my friend at Magdalen College cowers under the pile of books ahead of his own exam next week. Not ideal territory for two seminars, one on Fernando Henrique Cardoso’s economic policy, the other on PPPs in Brazil by visiting professors Albert Fishlow and Juarez Freitas respectively.

Fishlow ran through the three features of the Real Plan which helped deliver Cardoso the presidency in 1994 and 1998. But according to Fishlow, his big mistake was to opt for a fixed exchange rate rather than a floating one. Unlike the Argentines, the Real Plan was never conceived as being rigidly tied to the dollar. The consequence of fixing the exchange rate meant that when the economy and foreign reserves declined before his second election victory and into his second administration, ultimately forcing devaluation in 1999.

But it wasn’t all Cardoso’s fault. There were issues which he couldn’t control, including the apagão (blackout) after rainfall dropped, thereby reducing energy output (Brazil relies on water for 87% of its energy needs), the Argentine crisis and the US recession. Fishlow was also critical of Cardoso’s failure to seriously grapple with the social sphere, arguing that while primary education was expanded, quality issues remained. Too many students failed to pass while not enough teachers had full qualifications. As for pensions and social security, the measures passed were redundant by the time they entered the statute book while lack of economic growth meant public expenditure fell during his second term. Yet if we’re to think that this marks Cardoso as a failure, Fishlow and Leslie Bethell (the Centre for Brazilian Studies professor and chair) was keen to stress that Lula faces similar structural problems.

And so to Juarez Freitas’s seminar on PPPs at the above-mentioned Centre later in the day; unfortunately it was slightly dry, with Freitas emphasising its legal features passed in last December’s law. As a legal professor at PUC and the Federal University in Porto Alegre, that was probably understandable. Consequently, he didn’t delve too deeply into the political and economic reasons to go with PPP.

Nevertheless, Leslie persuaded him to say a few things about the political and economic background surrounding PPPs. At present they are concentrated on infrastructural and sanitation projects, mainly because these areas are the ones most in need of investment. Railways and ports are the main targets; the logic being that building up these areas will assist economic development and export potential. Furthermore, Freitas pointed out that following the privatisations of the 1990s (which Fishlow had earlier pointed out had been attained at premium value compared to their current values), there was nothing left to sell; PPPs are therefore the next logical step. In addition, PPPs are being implemented not only in Britain, but in Spain, Portugal and Croatia, which suggests it is a global phenomenon.

Freitas is at the start of his research into PPPs, much of which will concentrate on comparing the Brazilian model with that in Britain. Between the two he noted that while the Brazilian model needs bolstering in the regulatory sector, it was legally stricter in tone than that in the UK. In the subsequent question and answer session I asked why it was the case: was it to do with the nature of the Brazilian left currently in government? To what extent had it been modified in its passage through Congress? And how had the private sector responded to this interpretation? Unfortunately though, the questions were never answered, as Freitas took others over mine. And there wasn’t even a chance to ask him afterwards, as I had to make the long walk from Summertown to Magdalen to meet a friend for dinner.

Still, got to see the deer in the College’s park. And I made a useful contact whose work I’ve read on Cardoso and his relationship to social democracy.

Brazilian beats and rhythms

Couple of bits of Braziliana at the weekend. We made the last hour at Batmacumba at the ICA on Saturday night. Compared to the first session back in March, my companions were much more enthusiastic about the music, with some old drum ‘n bass classics being cranked out amid more eclectic offerings, including some Middle Eastern/North African sounds and a range of Brazilian musical contributions, from baile funk to Chico Science.

Good to see DJ Cliffy and his collaborators back on form. It’s just a shame it finished so early.

Sunday afternoon made it to Union Chapel in Islington for the end of Mestre Cobra Mansa’s workshop and joined in the roda, playing the agogo (bell). As for playing the game, there were too many people and I didn’t mind; just watching the mestre at work was enough. Not only is he a great player, he’s living history too. According to Matthias’s book (see post below), he was one of the few who brought capoeira Angola back into vogue in the 1980s.

The most important question

Undoubtedly best moment of the Barroso lecture? One student who asked him whether Chelsea manager, José Mourinho, was a typical Portuguese. Barroso’s answer? Definitely not; most Portuguese are modest and after the season we’ve just seen, he’s anything but.

Personally, I really like the guy. But give me a few more years, once the novelty has worn off and I’ll probably feel as cold towards him as I do Alex Ferguson.

Although oddly I felt the same way about Wenger a few years ago as I do Mourinho – and I still feel quite warm towards the Frenchman.

Aiding Africa - or helping ourselves?

The Portuguese pepperpot, José Manuel Barroso, was at the LSE on Friday. I had to go along, especially to ask him if he felt happy with his position given that it was unelected. Long time readers of my blog will know of my one-man – OK, one-letter – campaign to democratise the European Commission. But would you believe it, with a full lecture theatre I never got called to speak.

So what did the European Commission president talk about instead? His brief was to cover the EU’s role in aid and development. And since that is supposed to be the theme of Britain’s presidency for the EU for the second half of the year, he played a blinder. I fact, I started to wonder whether he was Blair’s new mouthpiece, so close to the script he was.

We got about 45 minutes from Barroso about the importance of concentrating on Africa, not just because of the humanitarian crisis of AIDS and conflict in individual countries, but also because it’s in our own self-interest. In essence an EU-funded Africa is a happier Africa and an Africa which won’t let its citizens invade our shores. Oh yes, and a more peaceful Africa provides a more secure market for European exports. As Barroso so clearly put it himself, self-interest indeed.

Barroso noted the steps being taken by Africans to improve their situation including the creation of the African Union and aid funds through Nepad. He said he wanted to push EU aid towards the 0.7% of GDP target from the 0.56% it currently is. But aid can’t only be more, but better targeted and relevant too.

In the subsequent question and answer session, a man who had worked in east Africa since the 1960s asked him the question which I’m sure was nagging many minds, but there didn’t seem to be a politically correct way of asking it. I don’t think he cared too much about such niceties and asked it anyway. Given the record of many African leaders, how could we be sure that the money would be used properly? He responded by saying that compared to 20 years ago the African leaders he was dealing with seemed more prepared to address the problem of corruption. But unfortunately Barroso had nothing more to offer than a form of modified conditionality, proposing mechanisms to ensure good governance. As any student of Latin America knows, ‘good governance’ has often been a veil to pressure structural adjustment, open up markets and economic liberalisation along a set of common policy subscriptions endorsed by the international financial institutions.

And we’re supposed to believe that all this has changed. Barroso was taken to task over the extent to which there was political will to make a difference in Africa, especially when the EU had shown its unwillingness to compete on a level playing field in the past. The president argued that the EC had announced an end to export subsidies, unlike other developed countries. He claimed the EC was ‘generous’ in this respect and that at the WTO ministerial in December the EC would press the US and Japan to produce a similar commitment. Furthermore, he emphasised ‘fair’ trade over that of free trade, but he rather spoiled his copybook by pointing out that the G20 (the middle-income countries like China and Brazil) would have to open up their markets too.

Personally, I’ll believe the EC is committed to free and fair competition across the board when it finally bites the bullet on the CAP. And the last time I checked (around two years ago), they had kicked discussion about its future cost into touch for a further decade.

There were questions from BBC journalists about the French referendum which elicited much hissing from the audience – I suspect you won’t find too many eurosceptics at an institution like the LSE. Barroso said once again there was no Plan B and that no matter how much he was pressed, he wouldn’t say anymore; that would seem like interference in a national election from Brussels. Personally, it seems to me that notwithstanding the political sensitivities, they really have no idea what happens if the referenda in France, Holland and Britain are lost. But as the companion to my right said, it will probably carry on as before. It’ll make little difference whether the constitution is approved or not. As for me, I think it’s rather poor when it appears to be all things to all men; what does it stand for? If the French think it’s too Anglo-Saxon, and the British think it’s designed to create the French dream of a super-state, then who’s right?

I’m almost tempted to vote no, just to force them into a Plan B; and perhaps to get them to think once again about fixing the democratic deficit at the heart of the Commission. Me for EC president? Who knows?

Reinterpreting the past

I may have written about last weekend’s capoeira event a few days ago. But here’s yet more capoeira material published yesterday at Brazzil, this time after attending Matthias’s lecture on its historical context.

I’ve started reading his book too. It’s very good even if it might seem a little academically daunting at first.

You can run, but you can't hide

So Pinochet and his supporters are citing ill health to avoid scrutiny of his allegedly dodgy financial dealings? Where have I seen that ruse used before? Oh yes, when Spain was trying to extradite him for human rights abuses.

Personally, I want to see him in court. And not just him; I want to see George Bush there as well. But before anyone thinks I have a pathological aversion to only those two individuals, I also want to see those who wilfully flout the law put on trial: Saddam, Mugabe, those responsible for the Tiananmen Square massacre and Tony Blair.

And you can add the Uzbek president to my list this week as well.

After Pinochet’s arrest plenty of leaders began to worry, realising they couldn’t claim immunity for conduct which would land an ordinary citizen in court. Time is now catching up with Pinochet; I’m waiting for justice against the rest.

Tedious politicians

I’m either becoming jaded or more cynical. Listening to Today this morning I’ve become convinced that Charles Falconer is a Humpty Dumpty figure in government. But with a difference. He keeps falling off that wall but someone (who has a lot to answer for) keeps putting his back together – and inflicting his blundering approach upon the nation once again.

And what is it with Ruth Kelly? She talked about the need for ‘learning support units’ in schools. Excuse me? Aren’t schools already those by definition? Where does she get this jargon?

Also, maybe it’s just me, but does anyone else listening to her on the radio keep thinking of Barbara the pre-op taxi-driving transsexual from The League of Gentlemen?

Putting together a flatpack cabinet

Since I occasionally get readers of the Lib Dem persuasion, I’ll venture to comment on the reshuffle – but just the once. And unlike Sandra Gidley, I have no ‘collective responsibility’ to adhere to!

Overall it seems to signify a shift to the right of the party. That is if you accept the fine gradations of difference which exist within a Parliamentary party as small as the Lib Dems. Keeping Vince Cable at Treasury and Mark Oaten at Home Affairs while promoting David Laws to Work and Pensions and Ed Davey to Education are all pointers of the rightward shift. Elsewhere Menzies Campbell keeps Foreign Affairs – obvious really, can you imagine anyone else doing it?

But most of these appointments are established figures; there’s relatively little new blood. With the exception of Sarah Teather, it’s very much the same faces making up the Shadow Cabinet. Although I know at least two of the new intake, Chris Huhne and Nick Clegg, are being prepared for the fast track. During the last Parliament Chris was given the responsibility of leading the working group on public service delivery (which may need rethinking now since it relied on regional government – and that’s taken a body blow after the referendum defeat for a North East Assembly last year) while Nick was often seen in leading circles.

Meanwhile I wait to see what my contemporaries, elected the other week, will get (see post below). No doubt wiser heads than I will be cautioning them to focus on establishing themselves in their constituencies before dealing with the peripheral (to Lib Dem) activities of political posturing in Parliament.

Then there’s the lower-order appointments in the Shadow Cabinet which intrigue me and obscure those who don’t have a direct interest. In particular I’m pleased to see that they have squared the circle at DEFRA. Organising Lib Dem responsibility there seemed a bit ad hoc over the last few years; when I went to work there after the last election I think it owed to the party’s need for a rural affairs researcher, especially in the wake of the foot-and-mouth crisis.

But the Government had decided to merge its rural affairs department with that for the environment. The result was a headache for the Lib Dems, with out first shadow cabinet member, Malcolm Bruce, dividing the work between me and a colleague, who covered the environment. But the team – despite being middle-ranking – was larger than most others in the party and a separation of responsibilities occurred after Malcolm’s reshuffle a year later. Then we had a dyarchy of Andrew George (rural affairs) and Norman Baker (environment) running separate operations under one roof. Now the party has seen fit to bring it under Norman, which seems sensible, putting the other half of the duo at International Development – which will no doubt assist him in his tanning opportunities.

I’m also pleased to see Simon Hughes given a brief which is more than just London. Will he be able to stand in for Kennedy when Blair isn’t around and his place is taken by John Prescott? There’s also Don Foster kept at what I feel is too underrated a post: Culture, Media and Sport. But he enjoys the job and has done as much as he can with it. Unfortunately it’s not high profile enough to get much media attention, even though it does important work.

That’s my take. But does it really matter who gets what? Taking my parents (both apolitical) as a weathervane, my sense is that for the majority of voters the Lib Dems are Charles Kennedy – and maybe Ming when asked to talk about Iraq, etc. That doesn’t mean the appointments aren’t important for the MPs themselves; shadow cabinet status improves their chances of future leadership challenges. But as long as the party tries to be all things to all men – as it has done at the last two elections – it will cease to make much inroad.

Finally, if the individuals associated with the senior posts are really intending to push the party rightwards, I remain unconvinced that strategy will work. I’ve outlined why in an article I wrote for Liberator last week – I just hope they use it otherwise I’ll have to post it here!

When is ‘modern’ not ‘modern’ at all?

Have Latin America’s indigenous peoples broken with the past in their search for identity politics? According to Goldsmith College’s Olivia Harris in the weekly LSE seminar, the record appears ambiguous. Certainly there are communities in places like the Bolivian highlands who are claiming a national identity which harks back to a time prior to the emergence of ‘modern’ Latin America, but it is also ahistorical.

Harris argues that the actual reconstitution of the past – through the reconstitution of past tradition and rituals – is a very modern process. It’s not an exact fit with the original version, but a modified variation on it; an ‘invention of tradition’ if you will. As an example she cited a community which was prepared to accept a family’s claims of royal blood and even organised a celebration to mark it. But when the family tried to claim royal rights and tribute, the community interceded; it would allow title but not actual practice, thereby highlighting the way in which contemporary acceptance of democracy has worked its way into an understanding of the past.

‘Modernity’ in Latin America is especially confusing given the ambiguity with which the term has been used. Today modern understanding of the state assumes acceptance of a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic society; by contrast, during the 19th century when many of the Latin American states were in the process of nation-building, modernity meant a homogenous, preferably white society styled on those of Europe.

Even more confusing though is that 19th century assumption of modernity was linked to colonial values which dominated official thinking in the region during the previous three centuries. And from the 16th to 20th centuries the indigenous were commonly seem as un-modern and inferior, a symbol of Latin America’s inability to catch up with the North.

Yet what is really interesting is that just as the ‘modern’ state became more accommodating and accepting of cultural and ethnic difference during the 1990s, indigenous peoples indicated their desire to turn their back on that modernity.

Gormless Wars

Walked past the Odeon on Picadilly yesterday to find Darth Vader and several storm troopers had taken control of the entrance.

But instead of running away in terror, passers by were doing exactly what I would expect them to do if ever there was an alien invasion: stopping to gawp and pose for photographs.

I wonder if the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy has anything to say about this human tendency?

Aching to be read?

My hard earned literary endeavours have once again born fruit. While I nurse aching limbs from the two days spent training and (incompetently) playing capoeira, you can check out my observation of the event here.

Already I've received two compliments, which is extremely gratifying. That will make up for the rants which I usually get!

For those who missed it and are interested in capoeira's history, there’s a lecture and book launch of a new book at Canning House tomorrow. Some of the participants from the event will be there, putting on an demonstration too. The details can be found at the end of the article.

Grim reading

It’s nearly a month since I wrote this piece, but Travelmag has posted the last of the three articles I’ve written from my Lisbon sojourn, this time on the Pena Palace. It’s not my best, being both shorter than the others and less thoughtful. But at least it’s out, ready to be pulled to pieces.

I just wish I had invested in a digital camera – then readers could see quite how repulsive the whole place is…

A change of direction?

Was anybody else disorientated by the new graphics used by the BBC weather forecast team yesterday? I get what they’re trying to do, using 3-D graphics so they can ‘zoom’ in to different parts of the country. It did need an update, especially since weather forecasting until yesterday was still broadly the same as it was when Michael Fish and his awful burgundy suit (it was burgundy, wasn’t it?) failed to predict the hurricane which wreaked havoc in southeast England in 1987.

But there was one aspect of the whole presentation I couldn’t get. Where were the clouds and rain? Then I realised – it was those dark patches, ON THE GROUND. And the rain? It was raining upwards!

Do the weather forecasters know something about climate change that we don’t?

Writing...

Spent a little time on an analysis of Lib Dem election strategy and how the party should approach the next Parliament. Hopefully Liberator will take it in their post-election issue but I'm hardly going to be presume that I have any influence in how these things are decided.

However, I've got another piece up. Following on from the Chile theme yesterday (see post below), Hackwriters has taken my review on Andres Wood's film about the 1973 coup, Machuca. I did post about it here on the blog last month, but I've tweaked and added to it.

So I reuse and re-cycle my own work! Is that a crime?!

One-sided agreement?

‘Democratic consensus’ during the Chilean transition (1985-89) was the topic under discussion at Sara Motta-Mera’s presentation on her research at LSE yesterday. Once again I walked in late, but caught what I think was the gist of her work. Whether we can talk of a transition prior to Pinochet’s defeat in the plebiscite before 1988 is a matter for debate (some might argue the transition only began after 1989 and isn’t yet complete until Pinochet’s legacy is dealt with), but Motta-Mera believes there were already shifts between the different regime, external and opposition actors prior to then.

Motta-Mera took a path dependency interpretation of Chile in the 1980s (i.e. the choices made at a given moment shape and determine their eventual outcome); the regime was prepared to negotiate as long as its neo-liberal legacy was retained and the pre-1973 political and economic models de-legitimated. The Church was also keen to depoliticise itself if it meant retaining a role in society and favoured a conservative form of democracy. Washington, perhaps influenced by the instability and potential pitfalls of authoritarian governments (e.g. Salazar, Franco, Iran), favoured a transition and leaned on the regime to deliver it – again without a severe challenge to capital. As for the opposition, the Christian Democrats sought to project themselves as its main hegemonic force. In this it was helped by the split in the Socialists, one side which eschewed ideology and plumped with the Christian Democrats, leaving the unreconstructed section adrift.

The challenge faced by Socialists raised questions about the extent to which this might be seen as a ‘consensus’ at all. While the Renovated Socialists and Christian Democrats saw the Marxist Left as their rivals, to what extent were the moderate Socialists pressured into accepting the transition model? As another participant noted, the use of the term ‘consensus’ assumes that all parties agreed and there was no one agent on the outside. But wasn’t that a contradiction if part of the Socialist party was left outside while its moderate wing was forced into accepting a neo-liberal model (and let’s not forget, the period in question – 1985-89 – was one in which the Soviet socialist model was still in existence)? Wasn’t the use of the term ‘consensus’ just a ploy to grab the moral high ground in the negotiation towards a final outcome?

Guilty as charged

Did I mention that the Mercedes in question (see post further down) was once again causing a disturbance, both in its position parked outside the LSE library on Sunday afternoon and distracting some of the younger, more impressionable male students?

At a loss?

What to do? No exam to revise for after the last yesterday and acres of time stretches ahead of me. But that's a mirage. Time to be getting on with travel details for research and organising interviews.

It never ends...

Beer

Finished my last exam, on society and development.

Today I will be mostly in the pub.

Feeling my age?

Just been looking through the election results and seeing lots of familiar names which conjures back memories of undergraduate-dom. I see two Lib Dems I knew at LSE – one in the year above, the other in the year below – got elected, while a former work colleague who shared an office with me and several others also ot elected. As if that wasn’t enough, there was also someone else who was in my year at LSE (assuming its the same person) standing in the same seat as one of those who got elected. And one of the women I worked with last year improved the Tory swing in Leicestershire North West.

It rather worries me when MPs start being people like me. I might have to grow up now...

An apt choice?

Yup, I missed the election night results. Was tucked up in bed at midnight ahead of my exam this morning. Still watched enough to see that for my local contest, Bethnal Green & Bow, they had dispatched Rageh Omar, the BBC war correspondent down to our part of the world.

Given the vitriloic nature of the campaign and passions on both sides, perhaps the Beeb was trying to say something?

Capoeira plug

Was at capoeira last night. More people coming out of the woodwork ahead of next weekend’s annual meeting which will see our group’s Brazilian master, associates and other schools descend upon East London for three days of training and rodas. Everyone’s gearing up to build their stamina and technique.

Should be a good occasion. It may be a little costly – especially with my current student status – but I’ll certainly be making an attendance for some of the time. Information is available on the capoeira group’s website under the news link if anyone’s interested.

Obligatory election statement

Yes, yes, I know I should post something deep and meaningful about the General Election today. But other than to say to get out and vote, I won’t.

Oh wait, there is one more thing: make sure you’re eligible to do so! A couple of Latin American friends received polling cards the other week. Last time I checked all none of those countries had made an application to join the Commonwealth.

The masses are revolting

Back to the LSE yesterday afternoon for a presentation about the pattern of social protest in Bolivia by Oxford University’s John Crabtree. In contrast to last October’s workshop on that country in Cambridge, I was more assured of the subject matter and content of the discussion. Crabtree’s presentation was designed to promote his new book on the matter, which can be found here. For those who are interested, LAB is giving away three free copies here.

Although I walked in late, I think I got the gist of Crabtree’s argument. Protest has increasingly become a way of doing politics in Bolivia, aided both by the relative weakness of the state and the social volatility unleashed by economic reform. For example, the closure of the tin mines in 1985 resulted in the dispersal of workers with formal union experience to other parts of the country, which has assisted organisation of protests in those parts. One example is the coca growers under Evo Morales, who have become increasingly organised. Other cases include protests against water privatisation which quick-started the whole process in 2000, demand for land reform through the sin tierra (a virtual remake of the MST in Brazil) and the so-called Gas War which forced the president from office in October 2003.

But there are differences within these different forms of protest. There’s no unity connecting them all. And in response to a question from me – whether he viewed the developing form of social resistance in Bolivia as analogous to that of Venezuela both before and after to the Carazco (when a proposed neo-liberal reform package unleashed mass protest and violence in 1989) and a subsequent split between political and civil society – he argued against.

There were big differences between the two, not least in the contrast between Venezuela’s president, Hugo Chavez, and Morales. Chavez has a whole system of patronage at his disposal and the support of part of the army. Morales, meanwhile, can’t claim the same. Even though he gas formed a party which sits as the second largest in Congress and he acts as kingmaker, sections of the military distrust him while he has proved unable to bring together all these disparate social protest movements.

Come in number 7, your time is up...

I supposed the fact that one exam is now out of the way is small consolation for a gorgeous sunny and warm Bank Holiday spent in the library. Notwithstanding awaking at 5 this morning in a cold sweat from a nightmare which consisted of 16 pages of closely-typed questions, none of which had any relation to the subject examined today (Comparative Latin American Politics).

But can someone explain to me how it is that on Bank Holiday the entire LSE library was packed to the rafters? I had to stand and wait until someone moved from one of the tables.

Most amusing moment of the day though came when the librarian announced that the owner of the Mercedes parked outside move it as it was blocking access to the library.

And meanwhile the politicians are all feverishly campaigning about ending tuition fees come Election Day this Thursday. Judging by the LSE experience, that's one place whose students don't need to worry unduly.

Wasted evening?

Went to Demos last night for a salon (apparently that’s what they call it now, although I’d just call it a roundtable) on creativity in cities. The twist was that the creativity they referred to was in Brazilian cities.

I’ve penned a piece on it, which I hope to link to later. The only thing I will say is that it was one of the less productive events I’ve been to in quite awhile. In fact the only thing I got out of the occasion was a chat with a BBC World Service researcher who has been working on a radio programme which will go out in August starring Paul Merton which will seek to harmonise humour in the EU – that is trying to find a joke which works in every country. They’ll have their work cut out with the Greeks and Portuguese I reckon…

Oh, I tell a lie – there was something that was substantial from the Demos event: free-flowing vodka and cranberry juice. That’s me: never one to miss out on a free drink here and there…

Update - the article is now up at Brazzil, but can be linked through here.

An alternative view

May I add my take on the whole Brian Sedgemore discussion? The Lib Dems seem to be falling over themselves in congratulation at what seems like a political coup. But three points seem to be in order.

First, why has it taken so long for Brian to see the light? Isn’t it a bit rich to leave Labour and join another party when he’s effectively retired from Parliament? Wouldn’t it have made more sense to have had the courage of his convictions and moved across the floor before the election?

Second, was he much good as a constituency MP? OK, so he represented Hackney for nearly 30 years, but you could put up a donkey with a red rosette in that part of London and see it returned. From what little I’ve seen of Hackney politics (and it’s a little, I’ll grant), he didn’t seem that active.

Third – and perhaps most tellingly – there are Lib Dems in Hackney who have misgivings about Sedgemore joining the party. When party members from the area concerned have doubts party HQ should be listening. After all, they are the ones who most likely have their ear to the ground and know how effective or not a high-profile defector may be the cause.

Then again, the whole thing will be forgotten by tomorrow. Oh wait, it has.

In the shadows

On a slightly more troubling note, few observers will have failed to notice that the election campaign is apparently getting quite nasty in Bethnal Green. Last week George Galloway was harangued by anti-democracy demonstrators to the point where he claimed to be fearful of his life.

But spare a thought for those not in the media spotlight. Although I’m not doing any campaign work this year (exams and revision is my excuse), I was copied into an email from a councillor to party canvassers. Apparently a team of them were challenged by young, angry anti-democracy protestors on the Turin estate who chased them away. When they spy them coming they ring around their friends and then confront the campaigners.

My councillor friend reckons the antipathy may be due to the estate being one of the most rundown in the area. But walking along Bethnal Green Road the other day I came across stickers plastered to the side of traffic lights and on post boxes saying the same thing.

I wonder how it will all pan out next week?

Election? What election?

Opened up my inbox this morning to discover election day has been moved forward to tomorrow. Oh no, sorry, it’s London University’s union elections.

It’s bad enough that I can’t make my mind up about next week’s choices. How the hell am I going to find the time to wade through this lot of grasping student hacks before noon tomorrow?

Over one hurdle...

A bit of a rush around today. There I was sitting around the flat this morning, waiting for the computer's spyware to finish its job. I know, I thought, I'll ring up Queen Mary and see whether they've come to a decision on my application to study there next year. What happens? Voicemail.

At that point the postman arrives, shoving some letters addressed to me - for a change. One was from the LSE. Yes, they were pleased to offer me a place. Hooray I thought, Queen Mary slipping to the back of my mind.

Then the next, almost sudden, black thought: tuition fees around £3085 for the next three years (minus living costs). So it was back to the computer to crank out yet another begging statement, highlighting my worthiness at some much needed cash for next year. Conveniently too, my former supervisor's accompanying reference fell through the door at the same time as well.

So now it's down to the LSE to place yet another funding application with those nice people before Friday's deadline. Only to be followed by yet another one which I'm now eligible for, having been accepted at the School.

Getting the place is only half the battle it seems. Whether I end up with the necessary funds to actually start in September is another matter...

Travel writing...

Lisbon is proving to be a bit of a writing inspiration. Another piece on the city, at a different e-publication this time.

Understanding the mechanics

My most recent piece is up, this time at City Mayors. For all those who wondered how Brazil's political system worked... well, here it is.

That'll just be the one taker then?

Keeping a lid on things

I hadn’t mentioned it after my quip last week regarding tensions in Latin America. But Julia sent an interesting article from the Folha de São Paulo (though I can't find the direct link to it), so it only seems fair to comment on it.

Essentially the article analyses the challenge posed to Brazilian foreign policy by relative political weakness and instability in some of the Andean countries along its western and northern borders. Ecuador’s president has finally been removed – the third in a decade, while Bolivia’s president has threatened to resign and Peru’s is only maintained by an understanding between himself and the opposition. And then there’s the agitation between Colombia and Venezuela, following a border incident earlier this year. The commentary suggests this may make it difficult for Brazil’s Lula to project himself globally, if Brazil can’t manage its own backyard.

It’s an interesting angle, especially since for next week’s International Politics exam we spent time earlier in the year assessing the pressures and actors towards greater democratisation in the region during the 1980s. It would seem that we’ve overlooked the limited institutionalisation of those processes since then and what directions they present for contemporary international relations.

Getting by

Struggling with a lousy cold at the moment. Hopefully it will all clear up over the next few days and before the start of exams next week.

Last week a couple of research posts were circulated to Latin American studies students – which I may well be making an application for. Neither are related with Brazil or political science, but as has been pointed out to me before, you have to go where the money is from time to time.

Also waiting to hear back about an interview at the Institute of Education regarding my application there. Initially it was rejected, but there may be a reprieve.

At an end?

Finally, after a few false starts and hiccoughs, my ESRC form is now with the LSE’s Government Department. I’ve done my bit, having bullied and cajoled referees and college registrars to get their sections completed, finally handing it over with a sense of exhaustion, yet completeness yesterday afternoon.

Oh how we laughed when we wondered what the ESRC meant by its 31 July final result deadline (I don’t get mine till October) and cried over whether we were to do it in triplicate or not – not counting my own little heart stopping moments when I imagined that a +3 application wasn’t possible at the LSE according to the ESRC’s website. Or the time when I had to weigh up whether five years of work and one year of a two-year course at Oxford constitutes a completed research training programme. Or the realisation that I have to go back to the LSE with a self-addressed postcard – the one thing I forgot…

Ultimately, who knows? As I said to the registrar yesterday, all this work and it’s possible I may not be lucky (it’s around a 30% success rate). But as she said: “If you don’t ask, you don’t get.”

And I've still got another form to get through before the end of next week...

Mutton dressed as lamb

I’m giving away my liberal persuasion when I say this new pope, Benedict XVI, isn’t the one for me. As a lapsed Catholic, I find it hard to square my views with his. I only had to listen to an interview he did several years ago, before he became Pope. He castigated liberation theology for involving the Church in political activity, when it’s evident to him the two spheres are separate. Yet hasn’t that been part of the Church’s mission over the past two thousand years? As far as I understand it, it was never just about future salvation, but also about improving the lot of the poor and needy now. And who can really be against using the religious experience to encourage changes in quality of life and the empowerment of the poor?

In the interview Benedict also makes it clear that he doesn’t condone religious relativism: the idea that other faiths may contain different dimensions of the truth. That is unfortunate, not only because it may undermine John Paul II’s past attempts to reach a compromise with the Orthodox Church, it may also pose a threat to the Islamic world, especially if those sentiments are whipped up and taken to heart by less thoughtful types. It’s bad enough having idealist extremists on one side; we don’t need them on the other as well.

Then there are the Church’s social teachings which I find so hard to understand: Catholicism’s implicit inequality between the sexes, prohibition on contraception, abortion and condemnation of homosexuality. Where’s the tolerance of difference, the acceptance of the modern world and contemporary social relations? I know the counter-argument: Catholicism is an article of faith, not a form of consensus. Yet it is this unwillingness to yield to social and political changes may well be wants ultimately weakens it. From territorial division of the Roman Empire to the Reformation, the Church has consistently failed to respond to the disenfranchised accordingly. And once again, it looks like it has missed the boat, with congregations falling in North America and Europe while in Africa it fails to face up to the challenge of AIDS.

I’ve also heard it alleged that the new pope doesn’t care if this turns people away; that he would approve of a smaller, purer Church. But that would weaken the Vatican’s claim to speak on behalf of a wide section of humanity. Then again, all this may well be the uttering of a cardinal who never imagined himself destined for the pontificate. It may well be that the reality of power tempers his excesses and forces him to steer a more mainstream path. But I don’t have form when I suggest such things – last time I argued this I was talking about George Bush in the first months of his presidency…

Could there not have been a more moderate alternative – even liberal by the standards of the Catholic Church? Probably not, given the conservative nature of the majority of cardinals, most of who were appointed during John Paul’s reign. And even the only apparent light – that this won’t be as long a papacy as John Paul’s – ignores a small cloud on the horizon: that come the next conclave it will most likely be the very same cardinals who appointed Benedict who will once again have to choose.

Democratic ambiguity

At first sight the following stories seem unrelated: the arrest of 8 policemen in Rio the other week for murdering 30 people, the Mexican Congress’s decision to strip Mexico City’s mayor from immunity, the sacking of the Ecuadorian Supreme Court by the president and Congress and Chile’s deadline to file charge on past human rights abuses.

But dig deeper and it appears that there are greater forces at work. Impunity, which dominated the past, is going out the window; the rule of law is increasingly making itself felt. That’s quite a substantial change from before, when off-duty policemen murdered without fear of being caught or the crimes of the Pinochet era were hushed up.

But before we get too exited about the virtues brought about since democracy’s return to the region, the Ecuadorian and Mexican cases may well be of concern. Actions in both countries have disguised prevailing political motivations, using the force of law as a justification for their actions. Ecuador’s Supreme Court was appointed late last year by the same president who has now dismissed them, with one of the main aims being to rescind prosecution charges against a former president. Meanwhile Mexico City’s mayor is reportedly among the most scrupulous and honest politicians in that country and therefore a threat in next year’s presidential elections to the ruling centre-right PAN government and former dominant party, the PRI.

What this shows is that the debate about democratic consolidation in Latin America is more subtle than they first appear. But then again, isn’t that ambiguousness central to understanding democracy? If it wasn’t then the subject wouldn’t be half as interesting to study!

Last, but not least...

And yes, I got a chance to have a word with John Harris after the meeting as well. Not about his quest to find someone acceptable to vote for, but about his first book, The Last Party, which recounted the story of Britpop from the sublime of Suede and Blur to the (at least to me) ridiculous of Oasis and Menswear (and which I reviewed here).

I told him I enjoyed it hugely but had a bone to pick with him. His was one of the few books which immersed me in a wave of nostalgia – more specifically back to the 1990s and the idea that ‘things could only get better’. He admitted that was the point, the association of music with the New Labour government only taking form after Britpop had become part of the establishment and ceased to be cutting edge.

I also asked him if he’s noticed the apparent 1990s revivalism which appears to be taking place. Judging by some of the fashion magazines Sonic the Hedgehog T-shirts are in, as are Nike Air trainers while Oasis will be releasing a new album later this year. Was he responsible for all this? I asked. His response: a relatively sheepish look. Read into that what you will!

And damn it, I forgot to bring along my copy to get him to sign. Then again, I might have seemed too much like a groupie…

Think tankery gossip

At Demos last night for a debate on who those on the Left should vote for and whether tactical voting could work against Labour this time around. At the podium was John Harris, who has written a book about his search for an alternative to New Labour, following some reports he’s done for the BBC, and Labour apologist and columnist, David Aaronovitch. Chairing it was Neal Lawson, who has broken with New Labour in recent years.

The meeting and location was exactly as expected: open planning, stripped wooden floors and minimalism abound at Demos – exactly what you would expect from a New Labour think tank. I also heard from someone that they had cut a deal with Ikea for their furniture – but does that make them cutting edge, or catching a wave after it’s passed?

As for the debate, it could be characterised simply: as a return to traditional Labour values (Harris) or a search for greater choice (Aaronovitch). But Harris wouldn’t phrase it as simply as that, despite Aaronovitch’s attempt to stereotype him as Old Labour with its commitment to statist solutions. Instead Harris argued that he recognised the need to change, but said greater private sector involvement without the guarantee of a level playing field for the public sector couldn’t be fair.

As to my question, both failed to respond, and Lawson didn’t take the bait. I asked whether this wasn’t a debate which had also taken place before the last election, with the result that Tony Blair promised to make his focus the reform of public services. In fact, that was the central thesis of Lawson’s co-edited book, The Progressive Century (which has been commented upon in this blog before), but those ideals appear to have abandoned in the period since, following the al-Qaeda attacks, Iraq and the so-called war on terror. Wasn’t the danger, I asked, that without any meaningful reform, Labour may well find itself in 2009 in exactly the same position as 2001 and 2005 – by which time it may be facing a more hostile electorate, who see little reason to vote for them again?

Iraq was one theme which was skirted around, which was refreshing – if anything, the arguments have been rehearsed ad nauseam; but I also suspect that a Demos crowd would be keen to avoid having that conversation. Consequently, there was only one spat between Harris and Aaronovitch over the issue, with Lawson sitting serenely between the two. Subsequently, I was told by a friend at the meeting that the two really don’t like each other – and that altercation revealed it. Admittedly though, my friend is an uncontrollable political gossip!

Among the other observations made was one by a young blonde woman who occasionally writes for the New Statesman. She asked what the future was for Labour when so few young progressives were willing to join. As a counterexample she pointed to the Tories whose youth wing was not only growing, but far more politically and ideologically active. In response Lawson highlighted the relative decline of Labour by mentioning a conversation he overheard between some Labour students at conference. They were discussing which member of the leadership they most identified with; several plumped for Geoff Hoon, which begs the question, what the hell does a Hoonite believe?!

Then the woman’s companion then launched into an ill-thought out and inarticulate defence of traditional Labour values. That got Aaronovitch’s blood up. He seems quite an irascible individual, but since he’s spent the best part of three years defending what many deem to be indefensible – the war on Iraq – it’s probably understandable. As my friend the gossip, commented afterwards, the problem with Iraq is that it’s now just about opinions; and Aaronovitch is convinced that he’s right. The result was he launched into these comments, taking them apart, stressing the hollowing out of politics in general, the fact that Africa and climate change were now on the Government’s agenda (for the first time ever) and that there wouldn’t be any substantial difference between a Milburn or Brown premiership.

Whether you agree or not with Aaronovitch’s muscular form of politics or Harris’s search for a feel good form, that last observation definitely seems to be the case. And with the polls showing the likelihood of Labour getting back in relatively easily, that prospect seems ever more likely.

Picking the right places...

Woo-hoo! So I've been offered some cash - OK, not all of it but enough to cover the main cost of a flight. So it looks like I'll be heading here and here in June.

And yes, before anyone asks, it's for academic purposes...

The other 11 September...

Saw Machuca yesterday afternoon in Chelsea. I think it’s a first for me, as I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Chilean feature film before. We were in two minds whether to go, especially because the day was warm and sunny – not something you can guarantee in London in April.

However, we decided to give it a go, especially since it was a preview and the director, Andres Wood, would be there to answer questions afterwards. And I’m glad we did. Well worth seeing, although I don’t think it will get quite the attention it deserves, not least because I can’t see it as a commercial draw in quite the same way as other Latin American films have been, most notably City of God and The Motorcycle Diaries.

Machuca is a drama about the friendship which begins between two 11-year old boys in Santiago on the eve of the military coup in 1973. The two boys come from opposite social spheres: Gonzalo is a child of the middle class while Pedro comes from the nearby shantytown. They first meet – and have to overcome their prejudices of the other – when the priest and principal at Gonzalo’s private school brings in some of the poorer to participate in classes. The film was apparently inspired by Wood’s own school-time experience when the priests at his school brought in around 40 shanty dwellers. He acknowledges this fact by a dedication in the credits.

I don’t think you can pigeonhole Machuca as a coming-of-age film in the conventional Stand By Me mould. While there is some hope offered by the two boys’ friendship, that sentiment is tempered on two fronts: the of the impending military coup; the knowledge that the coup will advantage the upper and middle classes; and the bleak future faced by the poor and marginalised – and which continues until today. Indeed, it is left to one peripheral character, a drunk and absent father, to state that fact: ‘In fifteen years your friend here will be running his father’s company, while you will be cleaning the toilets.’

In the discussion afterwards, Wood said he wanted to make a film which went beyond the politics of the period. This was especially so since he wasn’t sure that a film about Chile in 1973 would be popularly received. As I am regularly informed by those in the know, Chilean society remains divided in the older generation while the young either have little knowledge of the events which occurred or remain apathetic. Consequently he was keen to focus on the story and keep the politics peripheral to any discussion while working with the child actors. One audience member found this contradictory: how could he make a film which was so obviously political and not find himself talking to the children about the period?

But you can see why Wood was so keen to strike a balance, especially while a substantial section of Chilean society continues to believe the coup was a good thing: an overtly pro-Allende film would have discouraged many cinema-goers from attending and reduced its commercial appeal. Also, it may well have switched off many viewers.

When asked who he drew his inspiration from in cinematographic terms, Wood highlighted Patricio Guzman’s La Batalla de Chile, the epic three-part documentary on the last year and a half of the Allende government and the coup. Watching Machuca those influences are very clear: from the street protests and demonstrations by both left and right (including everyone jumping against the middle class ‘mummies’, rich women banging their saucepans in protest and the menacing faces and helmets of the fascist-inspired Patria y Libertad youth marches) and the tangible feel of civil war lingering in the air to the public discussions over the rights and wrongs of the priests’ actions in the school and to the dark and gloomy room in which the family sits, watching the graining footage of the junta – including Pinochet – informing the population that Allende was dead and martial law imposed.

But for me, perhaps the most vivid image is of Gonzalo’s and Pedro’s classroom after the military has taken it over: the walls stripped bare, save for a picture of the junta, and empty desks as one boy after another disappears – a reminder of the disappeared which persisted throughout the military period and over which many families have still not received justice.

Urban life

A sharp knock at the door this morning. It was a policeman asking if we had noticed anything happen in the flats opposite between 6.30 and 7am. Apparently there was a serious assault, but we weren’t very helpful, having only woken up when he knocked.

The police are still out there, having put tape up, while forensics are checking out the area. Meanwhile the local kids are talking to the policemen about their car while the younger ones are playing football nearby.

Election blogging

Given that a slightly more global election is taking place in Rome this week, what chances are there of getting those boys in red to blog the conclave?!

New travel pieces...

So my latest pieces are up at Hackwriters. One is a piece I wrote over a year ago and polished more recently on the different kinds of backpacking styles. The other is my first reflection of Lisbon. I should hopefully be able to crank some more stuff out about the place – for the first time I actually went somewhere and took notes to write up when I got home. It’s amazing how differently you look at things when you do that. But it also means always having your notepad in your hand…

Back

Just got back from Lisbon this afternoon where all was sun and escape from what is increasingly looking like the Tweedledum and Tweedledee of General Election, given the propensity of the Prime Minister and Chancellor to be joined at the hip.

I think I’ve got some suitable material to use by drafting some pieces relating to Lisbon. Suffice to say, I had a good time, overeating on way too many steaks and staying in the sun for too long.

Urban futures

I’m going along to this event on Brazilian cities in a few weeks’ time down at Demos. I’m willing to take bets on how quickly they get around to participatory budgets as an example.

Amazing, isn’t it, that it’s now all the rage although those in the know (ahem) have been extolling its virtues for quite some time.

Brazilian Left

Some extremely useful pieces on Lula’s government including prospects for social welfare reform and the differences between the Workers Party (PT) and PSDB (social democrats) which would be of interest to anyone, like me, interested in the Left. I suspect they may well end up in my dissertation’s bibliography later this year. Unfortunately, they are both in Portuguese, but for a fee I might do a translation!

The newsletter comes from the well-regarded Fundação Perseu Abramo, a think tank associated with the PT, and which I have a soft spot for, on account of their help and support during a spot of fieldwork I did in São Paulo five years ago.

Writing, writing everywhere, but not a penny in return...

Yesterday I got my opus – alright, application for ESRC funding – off to my first testimonial writer. Then it goes around the houses to the second and prospective department before making its way back to the ESRC by 3 May. At least that’s the theory.

At the beginning of the academic year it all seemed so easy, with plenty of time. Instead I was running around trying to complete the research proposal, trying to inflate my research skills, printing it off, checking for mistakes, printing it again and finally banging it in the final post. And that’s after I’d made sense of the 50-page guidance notes, only to realise I’d made an error in the whole process and had to go back to square one.

Now for the next week I’m going to be making myself unpopular with my referees as I harangue them to get it to the relevant department. And is there any guarantee I’ll be successful? About a one in three or four chance.

Slim pickings.

Meanwhile I’m supposed to be revising.

Postgraduate study? I’ve never been so stressed…

Locked away

Found what might potentially be a goldmine for my dissertation on social democracy: a treasure trove of papers from a series of seminars last year and earlier this month.

But for the love of God, can I access any of it? Not unless I’ve registered, which presumably I have to pay for.

Whoever said knowledge was a virtue?

Election titbits

So the race has started and they’re off. Three cities for the Tory leader and five for Charlie K by tea time. And I compare this to my girlfriend’s grumbles about not wanting to make the cross-town trip from Bethnal Green to Kingston for a few hours on Saturday. Puts things in perspective, eh?

But with just over 24 hours gone in the contest, I’ve had my first pieces of election material sent to my inbox. The Lib Dems’ youth section was quickest off the mark, offering to bribe me – bribe? Sorry, I meant pay – with my travel costs to help campaign. If that wasn’t enticing enough they can offer me a sofa or a floor somewhere too. Hmmm... I may take a rain check.

Then CK (does his office still call him that? For the love of God, why?) cranked out his bit, presumably while on his jet to Newcastle (impressive multitasking I thought). It was the usual guff, but what caught my eye was a bit at the bottom asking those with websites and blogs if they would like to plaster ‘Support Lib Dem’ banners all over their patch of cyberspace.

Me? Sorry, I’m declining. How can I be dispassionate and critical of all candidates if I’ve got someone’s label all over this blog? And besides, there could be a further reason, which I must come to: over who to vote for. The latest polls put the electorate in volatile mood and I can sympathise.

For the last 11 years I’ve voted tactically, usually to unseat the Tories. This time round commentators are talking about tactical voting working against Labour. And given Blair’s ill-timed words yesterday – “You [the British people] are the boss” – perhaps it’s about time he got a kicking, especially after he ignored those of us who marched against war two years ago.

Not that I want the Tories back in. But I want Blair’s wings clipped. And that means reducing his majority, boosting the capacity of his awkward squad and making it more difficult for them to pass offensive legislation like that on detention without trial. So how can this be done in Bethnal Green? Well, apparently Respect has a good chance of beating Oona King, but only if it’s done tactically. Unfortunately though, I don’t find George Galloway particularly attractive and the party he leads seems dubious, harking back to a world which only the SWP wants. So what do I do? Hold my nose and vote for him? Is there any other way of unseating Labour here? It’s going to be an interesting few weeks, methinks.

Finally, some entertaining news from the Lib Dem website:

Interested in standing?

If you are interested in becoming a candidate yourself, please email
the Candidates Office (England) or the Scottish or Welsh Liberal Democrats.

So much for the comprehensive all-day development day I underwent a few years ago during which all prospective candidates were assessed and rigorously scrutinised before being unleashed on unsuspecting party members - and if successful, on the public. I can never get that cold, bleak and rainy day back – in Warrington of all places…

Explaining my absence

Am getting my head down to revision what with exams just over a month away. Although somehow there was an oversight of this small detail at chez Burton last month with the girlfriend booking flights to Lisbon for later this week. So chances are there will be little from this end for much of this week but hopefully a few posts on thoughts and reflections regarding the Portuguese capital at the weekend. And then more virtual silence till the exams are done and out of the way.

Does it ever end?!